|
Post by kiyoat on Dec 4, 2018 15:31:34 GMT -6
... Denver looks to be solid, there can't be any speedbumps along the way ... Unfortunately, Denver looks like more than a speedbump. Looking at conference stats, I noticed that while the Yotes aren't shooting as efficiently as the last two years under Dawn, almost every stat is top-100. So we are far more well-rounded than in the past. Then I noticed that one of our few major weaknesses creates a match-up problem with Denver. It's almost as if that was by design... We are allowing 32.2% 3-point shooting. (#227 nationally, #5 Summit) Denver is shooting an insane 44.6% 3-PT (#1/#1) Denver is making 11.3 3-Pt/Game (#5/#1) Denver is scoring 90 points/game (#4/#1) Might be an area of concern.
|
|
|
Post by elcoyote on Dec 4, 2018 20:10:17 GMT -6
Even given your matchup concerns, a team that relies on the three point shot will obviously be dangerous in a one game scenario, but over the long haul and vs a tough defensive team it will also have a tendency to crash and burn. Just my opinion, but a one dimensional offense is not the way to build a championship caliber team. I have no clue if they're strong in other areas.
|
|
|
Post by coyoteglory on Dec 4, 2018 20:12:10 GMT -6
I agree with elcoyote on this one. Or maybe I just hope its true.
|
|
|
Post by gopheryote on Dec 5, 2018 6:12:02 GMT -6
DU played just its second road game last night. In related news, DU picked up its second loss last night.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Dec 5, 2018 8:08:23 GMT -6
DU played just its second road game last night. In related news, DU picked up its second loss last night. True. And I don't necessarily disagree with you. "Live by the 3, die by the 3" and everything. I just think it's concerning that arguably one of our biggest weaknesses (3-PT defense) plays right into their biggest strength. Honestly I don't care how consistent they are with it. They only have to have a good shooting night when they are playing us to mess with our season. I think that it's great that USD scored 85 last night, because we also allowed 74 points and 53% 3-Point shooting from a team that had been averaging 69 points and 28% 3-PT. Also, Denver didn't even have a down night shooting from the arc. They were 50%. Wyoming was 53%, and that was the difference in the game. The other stats were fairly equal. I think Denver won't have that many down games due to the fact that they have multiple guards that are hitting a high %. I hope I'm wrong. So far the only sub-40% game they have had was at Air Force, and that was their other loss. It would be interesting to know if their offense aids that arc shooting, like when Emily Clemens and WIU was so expert at the inside-out kick-out game. Denver's senior guard, Sam Romanowski has an unusually large number of assists. If I remember correctly, we never really were able to stop Clemens completely. We cracked the WIU code with better transition defense.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Dec 6, 2018 10:47:30 GMT -6
Current [and projected final] RPI of the non-con schedule:
#6-[19] ----Drake(7-1)--------L #8-[50] ----Iowa State(6-----W #15-[22] --Indiana(8-0)------? #46-[70] --Green Bay(3-4)---W #71-[14] --Missouri(6-2)------? #73-[212] -Montana(2-3)--------W #93-[113] -LMU(5-2)----------? #156-[82] -Creighton(3-4)---W #218-[227] Wichita St(5-3)------W #261-[128] Missou St(1-5)---W #292-[196] Grambling (1-4)------? #298-[287] Incarn Word(0-9)----W
Bold indicates likely post-season teams, based on RPI.
Indiana, Drake and Missouri look like the likely NCAA teams, with possibly 5 more WNIT teams. Wichita State is a better team than this prediction shows, I think. This is based on RealTimeRPI.com.
We need Creighton, Wichita St and Missouri St to start playing better.
|
|
|
Post by yotebewithyou on Dec 6, 2018 11:06:53 GMT -6
Current [and projected final] RPI of the non-con schedule: #6-[19] ----Drake(7-1)--------L#8-[50] ----Iowa State(6-----W#15-[22] --Indiana(8-0)------?#46-[70] --Green Bay(3-4)---W#71-[14] --Missouri(6-2)------?#73-[212] -Montana(2-3)--------W #93-[113] -LMU(5-2)----------?#156-[82] -Creighton(3-4)---W#218-[227] Wichita St(5-3)------W #261-[128] Missou St(1-5)---W#292-[196] Grambling (1-4)------? #298-[287] Incarn Word(0-9)----W Bold indicates likely post-season teams, based on RPI. Indiana, Drake and Missouri look like the likely NCAA teams, with possibly 5 more WNIT teams. Wichita State is a better team than this prediction shows, I think. This is based on RealTimeRPI.com. We need Creighton, Wichita St and Missouri St to start playing better. Omaha hung with Creighton last night in the first half before losing by 15
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Dec 10, 2018 8:32:29 GMT -6
RPI---------(Massey)-[SOS] 11 USD----(35)------[38]^^^24 SDSU---(25)------[4]^35 Denver-(94)------[112]^^^ 155 UND---(209)-----[104]^^^ 159 ORU---(166)-----[116]^^ 214 WIU---(202)-----[48] 281 Omaha(247)-----[305]^ 328 PFW---(318)-----[292] 332 NDSU-(293)-----[339] Dec 10 (games through 10/8 for RPI) RPI---------(Massey)-[SOS] 6 SDSU----(24)------[4]^^18 USD----(29)------[77]57 Denver-(100)-----[144] 179 ORU---(175)-----[97] 194 UND---(217)-----[81]\/ 263 WIU---(262)-----[66]\/ 273 Omaha(231)-----[308] 322 PFW---(319)-----[325] 329 NDSU-(287)-----[260] A couple of thoughts: 1. SDSU has set themselves up for an at-large bid, no question. With the win over Drake, they are now #6, and are projected to #29 by the end of the regular season, assuming a split with USD. They would probably have to lose three times to us, or lose to Denver, to not be eligible for an at-large. Even with that, I think the subjective votes go their way if they were to drop to #40-45. 2. USD is also in good shape, but If we lose to Missouri, Indiana, and once to SDSU, the projected RPI is #45. That's just on the outside of the bubble for an at-large. Going 2-1 in the SLT like last year could actually boost our RPI to at-large status, despite losing the SLT again. Lots of moving parts, though. Our SOS is dependent on our non-con opponents' W/L, and could change. Root for Drake, ISU, Creighton, etc. to win their conferences. 3. Omaha seems to be getting better, and WIU/NDSU are disasters right now. Ft Wayne is what we thought they were. Schedule-wise, If we hope our conference-mates put together non-con schedules that average in the 150+ range, most of them are doing just that. Omaha/PFW/NDSU are not. Part of that is the ability to schedule tougher teams. P-5 teams don't want to tank their own RPI, so bad Summit teams have to scramble to just fill their schedules.
|
|
steelsd
Sophomore Member
Posts: 167
|
Post by steelsd on Dec 11, 2018 10:08:32 GMT -6
A couple of thoughts: 1. SDSU has set themselves up for an at-large bid, no question. With the win over Drake, they are now #6, and are projected to #29 by the end of the regular season, assuming a split with USD. They would probably have to lose three times to us, or lose to Denver, to not be eligible for an at-large. Even with that, I think the subjective votes go their way if they were to drop to #40-45. 2. USD is also in good shape, but If we lose to Missouri, Indiana, and once to SDSU, the projected RPI is #45. That's just on the outside of the bubble for an at-large. Going 2-1 in the SLT like last year could actually boost our RPI to at-large status, despite losing the SLT again. Lots of moving parts, though. Our SOS is dependent on our non-con opponents' W/L, and could change. Root for Drake, ISU, Creighton, etc. to win their conferences. 3. Omaha seems to be getting better, and WIU/NDSU are disasters right now. Ft Wayne is what we thought they were. Schedule-wise, If we hope our conference-mates put together non-con schedules that average in the 150+ range, most of them are doing just that. Omaha/PFW/NDSU are not. Part of that is the ability to schedule tougher teams. P-5 teams don't want to tank their own RPI, so bad Summit teams have to scramble to just fill their schedules.I think you are probably very right on point with the bolded areas. P5 women's teams, even the upper level ones, have shown the desire to do H/A's with mid major teams assuming the team is someone that doesn't hit them in the RPI game. Also, a number of the top level women's coaches are very interested in expanding the scope of women's basketball and are much more willing to assume a risk in traveling to a good mid major than they are on the men's side. I wonder if moving forward we aren't going to see almost a "pseudo" conference of mid major teams that meets during the OOC part of the schedule. Seeing as that is how you make hay in the RPI game when your overall conference isn't very good makes sense. So for a SDSU/USD program to be scheduling H/A's with the likes of Drake, UWGB, FGCU, Central Michigan, Belmont, Quinnipiac, Gonzaga, etc. makes sense. You are assuring yourself of resume building games with teams that are probably just as motivated to do the same as you are. SDSU is doing this sort of schedule this year and you are seeing it to a lesser degree from a couple of those other teams as well. I could see an alliance of schedule of sorts amongst these upper level mid major teams to push for better RPI which then results in better seeding for the NCAA's and gives you a better chance to make a Sweet 16 run. I would also personally love to see the two Dakota schools host a holiday type tournament at say the Pentagon in SF. Make it a two bracket tournament and invite some of the other top level mid major teams (and maybe 2 of the local P5 schools like an Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska) as another way to bring in some good mid major and RPI building games while also getting local fans the chance to see more of these types of games.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Dec 11, 2018 11:09:18 GMT -6
[...] I wonder if moving forward we aren't going to see almost a "pseudo" conference of mid major teams that meets during the OOC part of the schedule. Seeing as that is how you make hay in the RPI game when your overall conference isn't very good makes sense. So for a SDSU/USD program to be scheduling H/A's with the likes of Drake, UWGB, FGCU, Central Michigan, Belmont, Quinnipiac, Gonzaga, etc. makes sense. You are assuring yourself of resume building games with teams that are probably just as motivated to do the same as you are. SDSU is doing this sort of schedule this year and you are seeing it to a lesser degree from a couple of those other teams as well. I could see an alliance of schedule of sorts amongst these upper level mid major teams to push for better RPI which then results in better seeding for the NCAA's and gives you a better chance to make a Sweet 16 run. -- Good point, and I think you are kind-of already seeing that right now, with lots of common opponents between SDSU, USD, UWGB, Drake, ISU, Creighton, etc. It happens organically with the easily-manipulated RPI. I don't think I'd like to see something like that be formalized, though. It reeks of exclusionary practice, and reinforcing advantages we already have. Prove your dominance on the court, don't make it a members-only club. JMO
-- Also, it will be interesting to see how the NET rating goes with the Men's teams this year. We might be dealing with some different strategies if WBB ever adopts a different system. Ideally the strategy should be just to be good, rather than having to play an RPI game. I think both USD and SDSU have proven our mettle in national tournaments...I would also personally love to see the two Dakota schools host a holiday type tournament at say the Pentagon in SF. Make it a two bracket tournament and invite some of the other top level mid major teams (and maybe 2 of the local P5 schools like an Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska) as another way to bring in some good mid major and RPI building games while also getting local fans the chance to see more of these types of games. --Now that's a good idea. I think getting power schools to the Pentagon might actually be easier than Brookings or Vermillion anyway, given that they would be flying into and staying in SF. Let's make it happen.
|
|
|
Post by yoteforever on Dec 11, 2018 11:56:28 GMT -6
Here’s something to think about and ponder. Teams that fly to play USD or SDSU usually come into SF. Regardless of which school they are playing, it’s roughly an hour to either venue once wheels are down. If you charter to play only USD then Sioux City is an option that’s actually shorter by 15 minutes. I think both USD and SDSU should work together to bring in power 5s or good mid majors and let them get 2 games on one travel voucher. Play the Jacks one night, and the Coyotes a couple of days later.
Estimated travel time from airport to arena in Big 12:
Iowa State....1 hour ( Des Moines ) Kansas......1 hour ( Kansas City ) Oklahoma.....1 hour ( Oklahoma City ) Oklahoma State ....30 minutes TCU: ....... 1 hour ( DFW ) Texas.....30 minutes Baylor.....20 minutes Tech.....30 minutes
My point is once they land in SF or SC they are peddle down till they hit the town. Many power 5 schools have to drive through city traffic, etc especially flying commercial. SF can accommodate and feed teams as well as any city in the country. Travel time is not an excuse anymore. Shouldn’t be a handicap in playing SD schools. As long as both teams are as good as they are we only can enhance rpi.
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Dec 11, 2018 13:13:50 GMT -6
Good point, yf. More teams should take advantage of the "Rushmore RPI-boost Tour" like UW-GB did this year. (Despite the two losses we handed them, we helped their RPI overall)
Selfishly I'd still love to see a joint Yote-Jack WBB mini-tournament in SF though.
|
|
|
Post by gorabbits on Dec 11, 2018 13:59:34 GMT -6
I also think a "tournament" in Sioux Falls would be a great ides for the women. Perhaps you have four teams in addition to SDSU and USD and every one plays three games in a semi round robin approach or two additional teams with everyone playing two games. On the women's side it is not nearly as difficult to get even P5 schools to come here. Witness top 10 Oregon out of the PAC 10 tomorrow night in Brookings and Louisville and Oklahoma last year.
Of course the coaches know far more about the benefits/disadvantages of such an approach then we do on items like this. For one, it would probably eliminate the potential for participating in some of the winter tournaments in the Caribbean, etc as you only have one tournament that counts as a single game toward the scheduling limit on number of games.
|
|
|
Post by GoYotes on Dec 12, 2018 10:05:42 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Dec 12, 2018 10:57:48 GMT -6
From that ESPN article:
The girls absolutely deserve this ranking. However, I think it's interesting that Massey has had the Jacks ranked higher all season, and yet the AP and this mid-major poll have the Yotes higher. I have to assume that the W/L record influences subjective voting, just like it does in football. The Marquette beat-down at the start of the Jacks' season doesn't help them in perception either.
As much of a homer as I am, I still have a hard time saying the Yotes are clearly better than the Jacks. They are pretty darn close. Both teams are built somewhat similarly. Both teams have great ball control, discipline, efficient shooters, good size for Summit standards, great coaching, etc.
The biggest difference I see is that the Yotes are committed to playing aggressive, physical defense all game long. The Jacks have the ability to go there, as I witnessed in their beat-down of Green Bay, but I don't think they want to play that way, at least for 40 minutes, game-in and game-out. For the Yotes they have taken on an identity, or culture that emphasizes hard-nose defense and sharing the ball on offense.
I think that is the main reason the two teams are so close in achievement. The Yotes' style of ball counters some of the other advantages the Jacks have, like size, and the highly skilled trio of Maddie/Macy/Myah.
|
|